MétaCan
Menu
Back to cohort
Record W4385217118 · doi:10.56557/jogee/2023/v18i38320

Physicochemical Alteration and Water Quality Index of Ede-Onyima Lake, Okarki-Engenni, in Rivers State, Nigeria

2023· article· en· W4385217118 on OpenAlexaboutno aff
MCLEAN STANLEY ESSIENE, Leo C. Osuji, Aduabobo Ibitoru Hart, M. C. Onojake

Bibliographic record

VenueJournal of Global Ecology and Environment · 2023
Typearticle
Languageen
FieldEnvironmental Science
TopicWater Quality and Pollution Assessment
Canadian institutionsnot available
Fundersnot available
KeywordsWater qualitySustenanceEnvironmental scienceTurbidityAquatic ecosystemHydrology (agriculture)Water resource managementEnvironmental protectionEcologyBiology

Abstract

fetched live from OpenAlex

Freshwater quality is deteriorating as a result of ongoing threats from both anthropogenic and natural sources, resulting in an overall loss of ecological integrity. To provide an easily-understandable summary of complex water quality data, water quality indices (WQIs) -the Canadian water quality index (CWQI 1.0) model -was used for two distinct purposes, to assess the portability of the water and its suitability for the protection of aquatic life. The Canadian Council of Ministers Environment's water quality index (CCME WQI) was calculated by combining three variables: scope (F1), frequency (F2), and amplitude (F3), to produce a single value between 0 (worst) and 100 (best) representing the water quality. Predominantly impacted by the F3, which resulted in a WQI score of 32. Ede Onyima lake was ranked “poor” indicating that it is unfit for human consumption and aquatic life protection. The lake was impaired by high turbidity (86 NTU), trace metals such as Fe (20.73 mg/L), Mg (8.67 mg/L), and Mn (5.92 mg/L) loads. Their remobilization during turbulent flow portends a harmful effect on the Ede Onyima's water quality, indicating the critical need for a cohesive lake watershed management system to sustain conservation purposes of the lake and sustenance lake-dependent livelihoods.

Fetched live from OpenAlex and de-inverted. Abstracts are not stored in this database: the inverted indexes are 8.6 GB of the frame’s 9.3 GB of text, and the host has 13 GB free.

How this classification was reachedexpand

Full frame distilled prediction

Teacher imitation

Not calibrated prevalence, not ground truth. Human validation pending. Learned from the 10,348 direct Codex labels and 10,348 direct Gemma labels. Candidate is the union of thresholded teacher heads; consensus is their intersection. These outputs are machine_predicted_unvalidated and are not human labels or direct frontier model labels.

metaresearch head score (Codex)0.001
metaresearch head score (Gemma)0.000
Version: codex-gemma-dda1882f352aValidation status: machine_predicted_unvalidated
Candidate categoriesnone
Consensus categoriesnone
DomainCandidate signal: none · Consensus signal: none
Study designCandidate signal: Observational · Consensus signal: Observational
GenreCandidate signal: Empirical · Consensus signal: Empirical
Teacher disagreement score0.017
Threshold uncertainty score0.418

Codex and Gemma teacher scores by category

CategoryCodexGemma
Metaresearch0.0010.000
Meta-epidemiology (narrow)0.0000.000
Meta-epidemiology (broad)0.0000.000
Bibliometrics0.0000.000
Science and technology studies0.0000.000
Scholarly communication0.0000.000
Open science0.0000.000
Research integrity0.0000.000
Insufficient payload (model declined to judge)0.0000.000

Machine scores (provisional)

The two teacher heads of the student model, read on this work. A score orders the frame for review; it never asserts a category, and the validation status ships verbatim with every row.

Baseline scores from an immature model (maturity gate not passed, 7 training rounds). Scores rank; they never assert a category.

Opus teacher head0.013
GPT teacher head0.266
Teacher spread0.253 · how far apart the two teachers sit on this one work
Validation statusscore_only:v0-immature-baseline · verbatim from the scoring run: score_only means the number may rank works, and no category label ships from it

Classification

machine, unvalidated

Machine predicted; a candidate call from one teacher head, not a consensus.

The models applied no category: nothing in the taxonomy fit this work.
Study designObservational
Domainnot available
GenreEmpirical

How this classification was reached, model by model and score by score, is at the end of the page under "How this classification was reached".

Quick stats

Citations1
Published2023
Admission routes1
Has abstractyes

Explore more

Same venueJournal of Global Ecology and EnvironmentSame topicWater Quality and Pollution AssessmentFrench-language works237,207